Talk:Coccomyces dentatus/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Hahc21 (talk · contribs) 11:44, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Review

Resolved comments

- Well-written Prose comments "Coccomyces dentatus is one of only two species are known with both a spermatial". I'd recomment changing "are known with" to "kown to have". "are known with" makes no grammatical sense to me. "looaklike" I guess you meant "lookalike". Factually accurate and verifiable Reference comments All sources are reliable from a first look and I shall assume good faith since I can only understand english, spanish and portuguese and hardly domain french and italian. Structure and formatting of references is up to standard, specifically high so no concerns here. Broad in its coverage Coverage comments Very broad and specific. This article not only covers the main aspects but takes them into great and helpful detail. Images Copyright comments File:2012-02-16 Coccomyces dentatus (J.C. Schmidt & Kunze) Sacc 199890.jpg — From Commons. Copyright verified. Rationale verified. File:2012-02-16 Coccomyces dentatus (J.C. Schmidt & Kunze) Sacc 199894.jpg — From Commons. Copyright verified. Rationale verified. File:2012-02-16 Coccomyces dentatus (J.C. Schmidt & Kunze) Sacc 199893.jpg — From Commons. Copyright verified. Rationale verified. Caption comments Captions are good, if not creative :)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Thanks kindly for the review, Hahc21. I've fixed the prose issues you mentioned above. Anything else? Sasata (talk) 17:48, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Nothing else. Passing. Good work. — ΛΧΣ21™ 18:34, 27 October 2012 (UTC)